right of choice?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Deadman_ny

Spaceman
We all know that abortion in this country is legal. I'm not dispuing this law. Nor am I saying a woman's right to choose should be taken away. Or that it's right.

I started this thread because a friend of mine recently told me that his girlfriend was pregnant. He was happy to hear the news though clearly nearvouse about the prospect of being a father. All those feelings that come with life changing news. I've been there, nine months of worry and doctors visits. Hopeing that everything is ok with the pregnancy and that you'll be as ready as you can be when he/she arrives.

Three weeks after he told me with such elation that he was going to be a father he came to me in tears saying that she had told him that she wasn't ready to be a mother and that she was going to terminate the pregnancy. Her choice, not his. This just doesn't seem right.

I'm not talking about abortion on it's face. I'm not even going to open that can of worms. Though in some aspects it does help with population control. I just do not think that it is right that if the mother wants an abortion she can do so evan without the conscent of the father. Furthurmore, evan if the father doesn't want the child the mother can choose not to abort and the father is legally resposible for the child until adulthood.

What about the right of the father? What if he was willing to raise the child? It seems wronge. When two people knock boots; even with birth control there is a possibility of one getting "knocked up". That is what we're told...in so many words. That as a "man" if you got a girl pregnant that you got married; in older times anyway. Now days such things are a bit differnt. You live here. Whats your take?
 

JasonRocZ

Vice Admiral
Interesting subject that's for sure but.. I have a daughter she's only 8 months old definately life changing that's for sure but.....I don't know it's a tough subject that's for sure.
 
I can see what you mean by the "father's right" but in truth, or at least from my prospective I child is being carried by the woman. So as far as I'm concerned it's her body therefore her choice. I'm not trying to push buttons here either, that just seems like a logical decision. I've thought long and hard about this before posting so no one please jump all over my comment.
 

ChrisReid

Super Soaker Collector / Administrator
I'm not talking about abortion on it's face. I'm not even going to open that can of worms. Though in some aspects it does help with population control. I just do not think that it is right that if the mother wants an abortion she can do so evan without the conscent of the father. Furthurmore, evan if the father doesn't want the child the mother can choose not to abort and the father is legally resposible for the child until adulthood.

You're such as Renaissance man, Dead.
 

LeHah

212 Squadron - "The Old Man's Eyes And Ears"
What about the right of the father?

Its easy to be happy about getting something if you don't have to sacrifice for it.

A father doesn't carry a child for nine months. A father doesn't nurse or raise the child in the same way a mother does. If a woman says shes not ready, thats a sign of greater maturity and wisdom than someone being excited about being a father.
 

overmortal

Bearded Person
At the risk of seeming like a Bible-belt ogre, if a woman aborted my seed against my wishes, I'd . . . well . . . I'd be terribly unhappy. I'll leave it at that.

As for "maturity", if you're mature enough to have sex, you're mature enough to deal with having a child. If you're not mature enough to be a parent (whether you keep the child, or give it up after birth), then you shouldn't be having sex in the first place.

Also, what about the right of the unborn child? I'm sure if you could ask him/her, he/she would tell you they'd rather live than be destroyed.

But what the hell do I know? I'm just a Bible-thumping Christian from the old-fashioned south. I'm obviously a hate-monger.
 

McGruff

Banned
I second the ugh, but as long as we're at it, I've always wondered where this "right to choose" is stated anyway. The Planned Parenthood types usually claim that it is some sort of Constitutional liberty, but I have read it cover to cover and can find no such mention.

What it really boils down to after everyone has turned blue in the face shouting their viewpoint on the issue - like most things in this world - is very simple, money. There are huge profits being made in the abortion business and while the pro-choice folks at street level surely believe in their 'cause', the Planned Parenthood executives who pull the strings are merely using them to enhance the bottom line.
 

ChrisReid

Super Soaker Collector / Administrator
What it really boils down to after everyone has turned blue in the face shouting their viewpoint on the issue - like most things in this world - is very simple, money. There are huge profits being made in the abortion business and while the pro-choice folks at street level surely believe in their 'cause', the Planned Parenthood executives who pull the strings are merely using them to enhance the bottom line.

Exactly, thank you. It's just like cigarettes. Once they've got you hooked (abortion pun), you could be addicted to abortion for life (abortion pun #2).
 

Death

gh0d (Administrator)
I second the ugh, but as long as we're at it, I've always wondered where this "right to choose" is stated anyway. The Planned Parenthood types usually claim that it is some sort of Constitutional liberty, but I have read it cover to cover and can find no such mention.

Roe vs Wade is where the US Supreme Court ruled that there's a "right to privacy", which is (via a path I'm not sure about, not having looked into it) where those favoring abortion hang their "constitutional right" hat.

Whether I believe that or not is another matter, and one I'm not getting into at this time.
 

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
Now, obviously my heart isn't really in this - because it's idiotic - but I promised the #WingNut folks a show.

This is one of those things that a) doesn't matter today and b) is probably also forgone conclusion in some long term scenario.

Lets be clear: no one is going to overturn Roe v. Wade in your lifetime.

The suggestion that abortion could be "re-banned" is a very base tool which can be used to splinter the masses without requiring any long-term commitment on the part of the government. They're killing babies! They're denying rights to women! Lets fight about it! Blargh, blargh, blargh.

You've all been voting for pro-choice or anti-choice politicians for your entire lives... and what have they done? It is a political non-issue - the nature of the system means that no candidate, no matter what they promise, can change the court decision (or would want to try - it would be suicide)... and the nature of the court itself means that it's nigh-impossible that it would would ever even be seriously considered.

No amount of 'It's a Choice, Not a Child' bumper stickers or pictures of dead babies will have one effect on the status quo, other than to distract everything from problems with they can actually affect.

Now, all that said: yes, in some distant future where everyone is shooting through space in organic vegetable ships and mining hydrogen from their magnificant sun-base then they're probably going to look back at our wacky primitive culture and consider us dicks for allowing abortion in the first place.

At the end of the day, abortion is something we do because it's really, really convenient rather than some great moral standing point. Blargh, blargh, blargh, right to choose. It boils down to the fact that screwing is really really fun and that spending decades raising children is not.

But here's the thing: if you're being completely honest, you feel *exactly the same way*. Raise your hand if you like fucking. Now raise your hand if you like changing diapers. Notice the disparity.

So it's the easy choice -- which in our far future puts it into the same category as how we now regard things like slavery or rounding up all the folks we don't like and melting them to death. And I'll be honest: I still think those things would be really convenient. Yes, top of the thread, I'm looking at you.

But the movement of society is against such things. Future-we will eventually develop some point where pregnancy isn't such a pain and raising children isn't so time-intensive and then we will collectively damn our anscestors for ever thinking it was okay to suck unborn children out of themselves with tubes.

It's the old "if there were a law, it'd be against it", except not sarcastic and also there is a law and it isn't against it.

As for "maturity", if you're mature enough to have sex, you're mature enough to deal with having a child. If you're not mature enough to be a parent (whether you keep the child, or give it up after birth), then you shouldn't be having sex in the first place.

That's great rhetoric*, except it isn't true. Young teenagers have sex and our culture presently is not organized in a manner that could even allow for them to be 'mature' in an emotional sense. When reality and floaty floaty goldfish words meet, reality wins every time.

* - please note the sarcasm, that was not great rhetoric. It was store-bought and you should probably return it and get your dime back.

Roe vs Wade is where the US Supreme Court ruled that there's a "right to privacy", which is (via a path I'm not sure about, not having looked into it) where those favoring abortion hang their "constitutional right" hat.

I don't think Roe v. Wade is where this was actually *ruled* - rather, it was a case in which the Court upheld the previously decided idea that the Due Process Clause ("... life, liberty or property...") also covered privacy.

What it really boils down to after everyone has turned blue in the face shouting their viewpoint on the issue - like most things in this world - is very simple, money. There are huge profits being made in the abortion business and while the pro-choice folks at street level surely believe in their 'cause', the Planned Parenthood executives who pull the strings are merely using them to enhance the bottom line.

I'll quote Frosty, ugh.

The fact of the matter is that there are lots of people out there who genuinely do not have your exact set of moral values. They don't have *my* set of values, and mine are *great*. There are lots of people - women, mostly - who do not want to go through the incredibly unpleasant process and aftermath of an unwanted pregnancy. I've never done it myself, but I hear it's pretty awful. FreeSpace 2 awful: from the physical toll to the social stigma... there's all sorts of reasons why women might want a discrete way out of a life-altering event. There is not some vast conspiracy telling people this, they actually feel this way. As with that last thread you idioted up, it's something you should try to understand in order to argue against. Learn the lesson Chris Carter never did: blaming everything on the conspiracy just makes people lose interest in what you have to say.

(As for even making money off it in the first place, it's not some giant crazy industry... it's a tiny part of medicine, a field which is facing an entirely uncertain future in terms of 'profitability.')

Summary: blargh, blargh, blargh, I agree with many of you but you're all still idiots, blargh, blargh, blargh.
 

JasonRocZ

Vice Admiral
In the names of all my Idiot Breathren.....Let's rise against the machine!!! muhahah.....yea anyways that's the reason why I don't have much to say, because anyway you take it your wrong even if you think your right.. because someone takes it as I'm dumb for thinking if I think in some way which is wrong or think in someway which is right but what I may think is right could be wrong from the opposing view, or if I'm wrong it means that the other party is right?.....so in conclusion....I have no opinion in this for it'll just confuse the hell outta me. :) Cheerio my fellow pleebs :)
 

ELTEE

Vice Admiral
This discussion brings back some disturbing memories for me.

Setting: East Coast Jesuit institution - Philosophy class

Cast: Classroom full of stunned and awed sophomores - one very, very, very old instructor - a Jesuit priest who liked to talk about anything sexual and, in any other profession, would have long since retired.

Result: Discussions on the morality of abortion which included videos and graphic discussions/depictions of the aforementioned process. I recall the uncomfortable feeling the class shared of discussing such things with an old Catholic priest. There was much squirming in chairs - avoidance of eye contact, and cold beads of sweat arising on the farhead.

The conversation would then invevitably shift to the morality of sex. We would have to listen to the old man go in detail about oral sex and the different methods - anal sex, sex fettiches, etc.

Then, I remember that one shocking day when one of the female students stood in angry desperation and proclaimed that anal sex was a beautiful thing which people in love should enjoy. The tension was so high after that comment, you could hardly breathe. I think I bit my lip wide open trying hard not to erupt in immature hysterics. I am certainly not doing this scene justice.

SO - not to go too off topic. I, too, feel that we are highly unlikely to see any official change in how the issue is treated legally. And, I'm certainly an idiot, so I totally agree!! :D
 

overmortal

Bearded Person

::shrug::

I'm used to having an unpopular opinion, but, I will say one thing that may seem out of character for my 1) religious beliefs 2) political affiliations and 3) locale.

Even though I personally find abortion to be wrong, and have many many things to say about the various "rights" involved, I do not believe it should be illegal. I think that it is an issue that falls into the 'morality' bin, and that morality issues should not be legislated or regulated by governments. People should be free do be as they choose (within some certain limits. See also "murder", "theft", and "rape")

And while I hold fast to my belief that maturity for sex means maturity for parenthood, I'll also say that I understand that people (including myself) don't always take that into consideration. Sex IS very fun, after all, like LOAF said. The problem is that life choices like that come with life consequences (not limited just to pregnancy, either).

First girl I ever had sex with, I married a year later. I ended up being a dad in this time (which, being a dad IS very awesome, I'll admit). The problem is that I wasn't prepared for what I'd gotten myself into by sticking my junk where it didn't belong. I made bad life choices. As a result, now three years later, I'm going through a messy divorce, and I haven't seen my little girl in seven months.

Some consequences of sex aren't so easily cured. And when I found out a few things about my estranged wife, I realised I should be tested for STDs, which I'm still waiting to hear back on.

I wasn't mature enough for sex, because I wasn't mature enough to deal with the consequences.

Ugh, I'm probably just working on getting banned again. Respect my opinion or don't; it won't change for your approval.

p.s. Being a Christian, I blame Christians for being so judgemental towards couples (specifically women) pregnant out of wedlock. I cannot stand the fact that there are Christians who spread hate like that. And I've been quite guilty of it in the past. For that, to everyone here, I apologize, on behalf of myself and all other Christians. I'd like to see Christians learn to show more of that Grace they keep talking about instead of calling names at people who make mistakes.
 

Ijuin

Admiral
Anyway, to leave aside the abortion debate for the moment and get to the original poster's other point, current society has very little consideration for the desires of the father in comparison to those of the mother. In anything having to do with divorce or dependent children or pregnancy, the greater majority of the time the woman is treated as the victim and the man as the victimizer.

Even when it's not man vs. woman, the man's needs and wants vs. reproduction/childcare are treated as unimportant. Fathers can not easily get "paternity leave" to care for a new baby and allow their wives to return to work earlier, nor are they as easily able to take a day off to care for a child in the case of illness or some other family emergency.
 

JasonRocZ

Vice Admiral
What about Man vs. man.....It is slowing becoming something, that is starting to become legal (Gay Marriage) laws...what about in domestic violence situations which one do they look at as the women (Victimized) and the man (victimizer) it may sound silly, but usually I put my hands up and am like "What is going on?":p

to get on board with Eltee, I'm an idiot, :)
 

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
Even when it's not man vs. woman, the man's needs and wants vs. reproduction/childcare are treated as unimportant. Fathers can not easily get "paternity leave" to care for a new baby and allow their wives to return to work earlier, nor are they as easily able to take a day off to care for a child in the case of illness or some other family emergency.

This issue is (theoretically) separate from that aspect of our culture, though. Rather, abortion is treated as a woman's decision because it is regarded a (private) health matter. The decision is whether or not the mother wants to go through the effects of a pregnancy and not whether or not they want to raise a child in the long term. Now, in practicality this is the same hair that separates BitTorrent from piracy, but it's why this particular system functions as it does.
 

ELTEE

Vice Admiral
Anyway, to leave aside the abortion debate for the moment and get to the original poster's other point, current society has very little consideration for the desires of the father in comparison to those of the mother. In anything having to do with divorce or dependent children or pregnancy, the greater majority of the time the woman is treated as the victim and the man as the victimizer.

This is really interesting. Men do seem to have less influence - and perhaps rightly so - in our society when it comes to issues concerning marriage, children, divorce, etc. However, I recently read an article that examined the nature of marriage and divorce in the former Soviet Union. Apparently, it is quite different there - men are almost always favored in custody hearings and divorce settlements, often leaving women with very little. This fact coupled with the present ratio of more women to men leaves many young girls going to school to try and learn how to be an appropriate wife.

Unfortunately, abortion was outside the scope of the piece, so I can't comment about the differences in "father's rights" for that scenario. I think it would be interesting to look into it more, though, given the the sharp contrast that obviously exists in other matters of children and matrimony.

EDIT - Just read LOAF's post - that's a good point. It may not matter which gender is favored in which society - abortion is certainly centered on the women's body and as such will largely remain a women's issue. Still, I'm curious now how Russians view the issue...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top